About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
. there is that incentive as well. you have to look at ronald reagan as well as henry kissinger, when they went into negotiations, said you have to come willing to truly cut a deal. you may get 90%. >> takes both sides. obama is very good in liberal rhetoric blaming republicans. even in "l.a. times", obama wants to help the middle class but republicans don't want to give everything to the rich which is not true. and a lot of liberals are saying this was a mandate to raise taxes? i think people can be pro-choice, pro-day marriage and have fiscal responsibility and live within their means. jon: well, i mean to be honest, angela, the president campaigned on a platform saying i'm going to go back to the bill clinton tax rates and the wealthiest are going to have to pay more money and he won. >> but bill clinton worked with a republican congress and our economy was not in dire straits that it is right now. so if he really wants to go back to the bill clinton days he should go to the table and work with republicans. >> also you have to look taxes were historical high. one of the things they're talkin
, former economic advisor to president ronald reagan with me today. art, good morning to you and welcome back. >> how are you, bill? bill: doing fine. thank you for your time. i look at some issues share with producers today. you say this is really serious and you underscore that. everybody considers it serious. you worked at the white house. you were in on these meetings. is this a forum for negotiation or is this -- what happens? >> it is a little talking to. they will both come in with their sides, their positions. there will be some sort of testing of the waters. we will see how responses are afterwards. we'll see aggressive play. then you will see which side starts giving in. we'll be following that in the next couple weeks. but obama has made it very clear, he believes he has a mandate but he really doesn't. he only got barely over 50% of the vote. reagan got 59% of the vote in his second term. the nixon won everything except massachusetts. so this is by no means a mandate. republicans still control the house. bill: let me be a little more specific on my question. are these negotia
's just that second terms have become synonymous with scandal. richard nixon's second term. ronald reagan's second term. my heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. >> the iran contra affair. bill clinton. >> i did not have sexual relations with that woman. impeached after the lewinsky mess. . that's trouble for roughly 100% of reelected presidents since 1972. enough to give you second thoughts about that second term. so, is there anything the obama team can do to prevent this? now, as bill clinton might say -- >> it depends upon what the meaning of the word is. >> the fact is, if there is going to be a second term scandal, it's seeds were probably sewn in the first term. the watergate break in, nixon's first term -- >> if the obama team was going to mess up, history suggests they already did. maybe it's something that has made headlines already, but maybe not, the lewinsky scandal didn't surface in 1998, maybe the obama administration will make it's own history and avoid a second term scandal. if not, disney world will seem
s, of considers under ronald reagan and george w. bush's tax rates in 2003. it's interesting, i found two universal effects of those tax cuts. first, in every instance we cut the rates, the economy worked faster. it did work, mr. president, we got a lot of growth. but the second may be more interesting, is that guess what happened to the share of taxes paid by the rich. they went up, in fact, if you want to get more money, mr. president, out of rich people, cut their tax rate, don't raise them, because history proves it. >> dave: certainly did in the reagan years and another peace in the wall street journal a couple back, clinton rates, raised top tier 39.6 and as the authors of that piece said produced the one period of shared prosperity not because they raised taxes, but certainly lead to growth, right? >> no question. the 1990's was a prosperous era, but i think that sometimes people get a little of that history wrong what happened in the 1990's, president clinton raised taxes in the first year in office and remember, the first two years in office were a catastrophe and in fa
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)